Howard Dean on supporting Dems "who may disagree with us on a fundamental issue" [View all]

[ProSense]

DEAN: The Pro-Life candidates that I was interested in supporting were people who agreed with the Democratic platform in almost every other respect. Therefore, it's very clear, that even a Pro-Life Democrat who may disagree with us on a fundamental issue is a huge improvement over the person who was there before. So, are there some Democrats I would not support? Yes—and No I'm not gonna tell you who they are. But there are not many. Most of the Democrats who are Pro-Life—are very very good on a lot of other issues and I don't want to exclude people like that from out party.

- more -

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/606/transcript.html

Wendy Davis is pro-choice, but pro-gun. Should Democrats withhold their support?

The 50-state strategy carried a lot of blue dogs to Congress.

Howard Dean, vindicated

Only weeks after the Democratic National Committee chose Howard Dean as its chairman last year, the nasty whispers began to circulate around Washington and among longtime party donors and activists in cities from New York to Los Angeles. “He’s going to be a disaster,” they muttered. “He can’t raise any money. He doesn’t know what he’s doing. And what does he mean by this crazy 50-state strategy?”

Those early days must have been painful for the former Vermont governor — still smarting back then from his presidential primary defeat and that endlessly looped “scream” video — and he endured a barrage of snarks and snipes from the Democratic congressional leadership as well. Unfortunately for Dean, he doesn’t play the Washington press corps nearly as well as do rivals like Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., who ran the House Democrats’ campaign committee, or Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who performed the same role in the Senate.

<...>

Breaking that advantage would be costly and difficult, as Dean well realized, but it had to be done someday, or the Democrats would fulfill Karl Rove’s dream of becoming a permanent minority party — or fading away altogether. Against the counsel of party professionals, whose long losing streak has done little to diminish their influence, the new chairman began the process of re-creating the Democratic Party in 2005. And contrary to the gossip and subsequent press reports, he succeeded in raising $51 million last year, about 20 percent more than in 2003 and a party record for an off year.

Much of that money was spent in ways that obviously paid off on Tuesday, including the 2005 election of Democratic Gov. Tim Kaine in Virginia — where Jim Webb’s upset victory over incumbent Sen. George Allen overturned Republican control of the Senate. Several million dollars was spent on rebuilding the party’s national voter files, yet another essential sector in which the Republicans have enormous technological superiority.

- more -

http://www.salon.com/2006/11/10/dean_dems/

You can see the candidates won the House and Senate in 2006:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections,_2006#Seats_that_changed_party

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2006#Race_summary

A lot of them lost in 2010. I have to admit that I was glad to see Jason Altmire lose.

http://my.democrats.org/page/event/detail/4jg8j

Jim Webb, who retired in 2012, was also no great loss. The two current Senators from VA are of a similar mold.